turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:West Virginia
Are the DSA and 2G sections necessary? I don't see any real merit to "In this timeline, such-and-such never existed," unless some story element really calls this fact out. Turtle Fan (talk) 11:10, October 14, 2015 (UTC) The DSA storyline does call attention to it. Maybe the 2G section is unnecessary.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 11:29, October 14, 2015 (UTC) :DSA is useful. The various Crosstime employees comment on the fact that this should be West Virginia. ::Now that I think of it, they're probably right that it should. The mountain men's disaffection toward their Tidewater cousins was already decades old in '61. There was a long history of underrepresentation in state politics (the lack of a three fifths compromise would make that even worse), a geography and climate that should naturally give them more in common with Ohio and Pennsylvania, and a border region with the rest of Virginia so easily defensible that even McClellan won battles there, with an outnumbered army to boot. In a North America where shifting borders are the norm, West Virginia wouldn't remain part of Virginia for long. Turtle Fan (talk) 21:30, October 14, 2015 (UTC) :The T2G section--someone went around going that with all the states and NAU provinces. Undoing it all at this stage would probably require more work than it was worth. TR (talk) 15:31, October 14, 2015 (UTC) :Yes, I thought it was wasted effort but didn't do anything at the time. Most of the NAU provinces were on the map in the frontispiece but were not mentioned in the story. I had done up Provinces of the NAU outlining how their boundaries compared to OTL but someone wanted to add the info to existing state and province articles and create any that didn't exist. You may remember Talk:Nunavut where I mentioned some of the problems. When anonymous (but I believe he had the same IP number) tried to expand the African Countries template with a new country article that just said it became a Race colony at the the Peace of Cairo, I put my foot down and deleted it. As TR says, its too late for NAU to worry about it although most articles exist for more substantive reasons so adding a T2G sub-section isn't so egregious. ML4E (talk) 17:18, October 14, 2015 (UTC) ::It still bugs me, but if it doesn't bother anyone else, I guess I'll yield to the majority. Turtle Fan (talk) 21:30, October 14, 2015 (UTC) New GotS Literary Comment 90TheGeneral09 created the Lit. Comm. in the GotS sub-section yesterday. While of some interest in the historical sense, I don't think its necessary here. The sub-section can be expanded somewhat, since I recall General Lee and President Davis discussing how unlikely West Virginia was to rejoin Virginia plus Benjamin Butler making a sardonic comment about Secessionists complaining about the illegality of WV succession. The sub-section discussing this would be a better way to handle it than a Lit. Comm. on the historical facts three years prior. ML4E (talk) 16:43, June 8, 2019 (UTC) :The note should go, but the references ML4E brought up should be integrated. I'm not sure what the 90TheGeneral09 was aiming for. TR (talk) 17:48, June 9, 2019 (UTC) :Alternatively, the second paragraph in the OTL section on the Wheeling Conventions might be beefed up with the info from the Lit. Comm. I assume they are about the same thing? In the mean time, I'll dig out my copy of the GotS and see what I can do. ML4E (talk) 17:53, June 9, 2019 (UTC) ::I reviewed online. Aside from what I've added about WV being a point of contention, there isn't that much in the novel that I can find. Worrying about its secession from VA is just unnecessary. The lit com isn't worth keeping. TR (talk) 16:19, June 10, 2019 (UTC) :::True, I don't see any value in the Lit Comm. Want to wait until TF has had a chance to comment? ML4E (talk) 18:21, June 10, 2019 (UTC) ::::I'm cool with removing. Turtle Fan (talk) 13:30, June 17, 2019 (UTC) :::: ::::I see I definitely should have tuned in and argued my case here before the decision was made. Specifically, for TR, I will explain what I was "aiming for". The point was that a remarkable amount of West Virginia's counties did not actually vote in favor of leaving Virginia, and the eastern-most county in particular was *very* opposed to being dragged along. Mentioning this provided useful background information, since the novel itself treats West Virginia as being much more solidly pro-Union. Residents of what is now West Virginia had a lot of disagreements with Richmond and the eastern end of the state going back pretty much to the beginnings of Virginia, but not all of them wanted to go so far as leaving the state. The novel, I felt, treats the matter as too black-and-white. 90TheGeneral09 (talk) 21:46, July 5, 2019 (UTC) :::::While your historical assessment has merit, I'm not sure it really matters at this wiki, especially as WV is mentioned a comparatively few times throughout the novel. TR (talk) 00:48, July 6, 2019 (UTC) :::::The counties didn't get a vote at all. The creation of West Virginia came about when Senator John Carlisle proposed dividing Virginia in two to the US Congress. Congress backed the resolution, and pursuant to Article IV, Section III of the Constitution, it was necessary to obtain permission from the Virginia legislature, then meeting in Wheeling. This permission was granted. :::::There were two counties in northwestern Virginia that had not been part of West Virginia originally, but were transferred to it in 1864 after the Union Army seized control of them and sought to restore civil government. Is that what you're referring to? Since they were not contiguous with the portion of the newly-shrunken Virginia that had been liberated from the Confederates, tacking them onto the new state was done as an expedient. After the war Virginia sued West Virginia to get them back, but lost. :::::At any rate, while it's true that there were Secesh in West Virginia, it's hardly significant to the story. Turtle Fan (talk) 00:55, July 6, 2019 (UTC)